Polls Show JohnMcCallum‘s Full of Shit.

It basically tells us John McCallum is full of shit based on his own government’s internal polling. By this, I mean Canadians don’t want more immigrants despite pronouncements from McCallum to the contrary. And his government knows this.

John McCallum

This follows a Nanos poll conducted on behalf of the Globe which saw 16% of Canadiansfavouring an increase of immigrants with more than twice as many, some 39%, wanting a decrease with 37% thinking the numbers should remain the same. Put another way … 76% of Canadianspolled don’t want an increase in the numbers of immigrants.

(Coincidentally, White-Euro Canadians are just 76% of Canada’s population, having plummeted from a proportionate 95% in 1981 — ELN Editor)

Canadiansdon’t want more, and we haven’t wanted more immigrants for a long time. Here’s an EKOS poll conducted in March of 2015 and published in the Winnipeg Free Press that found 46% of respondents felt there are toomanyimmigrants coming to the country, with 41% saying too many of them are non-white.Here’s another poll. And another. And yet another.

Despite poll after poll, telling the government time after time, be it Liberal or Conservative, that we don’t want more immigrants, in fact we want less, they go ahead and give us more immigrants and John McCallum is going to do the same. He’s already hinted at it. Since he’s already made up his mind, his national consultations were just a PR stunt.

Were they to be truthful with us, it’s too keep, I believe, Canada‘s housing market from imploding because we’re in too deep now and no one has a solution on how to deal with it and no one in Ottawawants to confront it because no one in Ottawawould know how to handle a crash.

It’s amateur hour on Parliament Hill for the next four years, at least. So it’s best to keep pushing it off into the indefinite future with fingers crossed and hope it solves itself for without the housing market, Canada‘s economy doesn’t have much going for it at the moment, and it’s a market driven by debt and cheap money. If cheap money is how immigrantsare paying for their shitty urban sprawl houses on incomes from shitty paying jobs many of them (have), then we’re making the situation worse by making the bubble bigger. Because if interest rates were to rise, how many people will still be able to afford the house they bought when interest rates were low. If you’re a gambling man you might want short Canada’s banks. >>SOURCE

Share this news:

Like this:

The Race-Mixing Imperative

Biologically, the disappearance of a people, an ethnicity, or a raceis achieved principally through others intermixing with its women — that is — with their wombs. The union of a woman of race X with a male of race Y is much more dangerous for race X than for race Y. For women are the biological and sexual reservoir of a race, a people, a genetic patrimony — not men.

[The widespread mating of two distinctly different races means the eventual end of both races – in biological terms – and the creation of a new, bastardized, indeterminate racial type. From a racial standpoint… miscegenation means death. –Source–]

Indeed, a woman can only bear a limited number of children in her life, while man can generate a multitude with any number of fertile women.

Demographers only define fertility and population renewal in terms of the number of children per woman, by maternity and not by paternity.

This is why today we must as an even more serious problem to that of uncontrolled immigration of third-world populations (which have a higher fertility rate) into the countries of Europe (and North America), namely the problem of the interbreeding of White women with men of colour, which, in France especially, is reaching noticeable proportions.Not only does the Whiterace thus face competition within its own territory, not only does it fail to renew itself across generations with its weak rate of fertility (that is, everywhere under two children per woman), but a fraction of its reproducing women are subtracted from the number which will reproduce their own kind, and opt instead, to give birth to mixed-race persons. So, besides the growth of a foreign population pouring across our borders and reproducing itself via its practice of endogamy, fertile White women are having fewer children and, on top of this, a portion of them are offering themselves to foreigners.

Whites, with a few exceptions, are the only people who are not concerned about theircollective future, who do not possess a racial consciousness, so guilty and complex-ridden have they become. One of the causes, in addition to their universalist christianoform mentality, is perhaps to be sought in the consequences of Nazism, which have provoked a mental paralysis and collective bad conscience.

In the end, this very serious situation will result, if it continues, in a gradual silent genocide of WHITES in Europe — their own cradle (soon to be composed mostly of foreigners, mixed-race persons, and an ever-diminishing proportion of Whites) — as the historian PierreChaunu and the journalist GeorgesSuffert suggested in their book, The White Plague, published at a time when the phenomenon had barely begun. This is the fate which lies in wait for France, and which the vision of the streets at the end of the school day confirms ever more disquieting year after year.

When a people transforms its genetic patrimony and biological composition to this extent, it clearly ceases to be itself. If nothing changes, the inhabitants of Europe at the end of the twenty-first century will no longer be persons of Europeanorigin, and thus European Civilisation will no longer exist. Europeitself will no longer exist as a demographic, but merely as a geographical expression. It will simply be an appendix of Africa, entirely devoid of an ethnic consciousness (contrary to most of the other peoples of the world), though the Europeansof the West consider this cataclysm with the indifference of the living dead. The demographic indicators are certainly indicative of this future, and are truly terrifying.

A very subtle ideological model has been created in order to destabilise the minds of young Whitewomen. Its basis is the supposedly greater virility of African and North African men, a theme which has been doing the rounds in our society for a long time. There are comparatively very few cases of relationships between White women and Far-Easterners.

Another real and worrisome element is the de-virilisation of European men, who appear unable to defend ‘their’ women. This ethological phenomenon is very disturbing. When the males of a group — in all higher vertebrates — are no longer capable of strength, virility, or domination, the females turn to the males from the othergroup.

Often, young Whitegirls in working-class neighbourhoods quite paradoxically seek to be ‘protected’ by taking a foreignboyfriend. Protected by the co-religionists of their boyfriends, they are trying to avoid harassment. In the more bourgeois neighbourhoods, we witness another phenomenon: provocative snobbery. Young White girls want to provoke those around them, and their families by going out with a Black or Arab boy, or some other foreigner. They thus show — by a soft and spongey conformism — that they are ‘anti–racist’ and “keeping up with the times”.

It is very strange that the man of colour is proud to be seen with a White woman and to give her children. There are various contradictory reasons for this.

First of all, it is a matter of signaling the appropriation of a Whitewoman in order to humiliate the Whiteman on his own turf.

This capture of the female is a very ancient ethological phenomenon for which history offers many examples, the roots of which are found in the animal kingdom.

To be seen with a White woman is both a mark of pride and of revenge. At the same time, in Africaand the MiddleEast, men of the higher classes aspire to whiten themselves by taking a European wife; this is the case with a number of African and Arab monarchs. Similarly, African and Antillean women — from the days of French colonialism right up until today — dream of nothing but marrying a European not only for the prestige, but also to have less coloured children.

In these two contradictory cases, we observe a schizophrenic inferiority-superiority complex: humiliate the dominant White man by taking a White wife, but at the same time ‘whiten’ one’s own descendants, implicitly acknowledgingfeelings of belonging to an inferiorrace.

Destroy the White race while whitening oneself: an insurmountable contradiction. Consider, too, Senghor, the ‘Négritude’ movement’s poet, who married a White woman and had mixed-race children!

One exception to this trend is the Tribe Ka. This Black racist, extremist, and violently anti-Zionist group led by Kémi Séba (an ideologue of rather limited powers) takes inspiration from American radical Black movements and claims to reject mixture with Whites and to dissuade Blacks from looking for White wives. However, this is a rather louche position, for these people are perfectly able to reproduce with African women, to establish African families and brotherhoods in France, and in no way do they forbid the impregnation of White women.

* * *

We should also consider that other phenomenon involving inversion. The imperative of miscegenation (if possible with a White woman) is of course founded on the egalitarian ideology of anti-racism.

At the same time, the attraction to Arab and Black men, or to swarthy men more generally, is based upon very ambiguous imagery. Such men are supposedly super-virile and perform exceptionally well sexually. But the image which is offered in the media and most notably in the pornographicindustry is that of animal strength: no longer Tarzan, but KingKong. Sporty, athletic, violent, with a penis and muscles inversely proportional to his cerebralcapacities. In short, the image of the lover of colour is that of animalism. The Black and the Arab man is implicitly and subtly reduced to the status of human beasts. This entirely contradicts the anti-racist agenda which is the heart of the dominant ideology: an unconscious racism is at the heart of anti-racism….

Of course, this belief in the sexual and physical super-capacity of the Black or the Arab is a myth which corresponds to no reality. It is a fantasy to which the de-structured White woman succumbs, stupefied by the gigantic media propaganda machine.

* * *

Mass immigration and the racial mixing of native women in Europe will gradually lead to ethnic chaos, the formidable drawbacks of which are twofold. It will result, firstly, in the creation of a society broken into hostile communities subject to the law that multi-racialism equals multi-racism, and secondly in the presence of a population of mixed-race people hovering between two identities which is especially unstable. Such a society is difficult to govern because of its heterogeneity and, as Aristotle saw, unsuited to democracy or social peace, always inclined to violence and constantly threatened by despotism.

This is why the French republican ideological belief (taken up by the other countries of Europe) in a ‘multicoloured France’ that can succeed if ‘integration’ is possible (that is to say, if the incredible crystallisation of a heterogeneous and chaotic biological and ethnic base into a homogeneous society is possible) amounts to a belief in miracles and the stupidest utopia, for which the fetish-term diversity is repeated like a totem.

Moreover, let us take a look at the geographic areas where strongly racially mixed populations are concentrated:

North Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, the Antilles. Even Black Africa, where the colonial borders placed irreconcilable ethnic groups side by side, has known the same endemic disorders. Instability and violence, the fruit of ethnic chaos, are in every case chronic. The central power is everywhere corrupt and hyper-authoritarian. Is this what awaits France?

* * *

It is appropriate to challenge here a dogmatic counter-truth propagated by the dominant ideology: that Francehas always been racially mixed because over the course of centuries it has seen waves of immigration. Of course, current immigration and racial mixture will be beneficial because it creates diversity. This is a confusion between diversity and chaos, heterogeneity within proximity and mass random mixture between differing biological types and cultures.

Now, four things must be noted: 1) In Antiquity, both the Germanicinvasion-immigration waves into Gauland the implantation of Italic-Roman colonies concerned closely related populations; the Muslim incursion and installation in Provence-Languedoc [in the eighth century AD –Tr.] involved limited numbers, and many of the invaders were expelled;

2) the surges of immigration into France which began in the nineteenth century came from Europe (Italy, Belgium, the Iberian Peninsula, Central and Eastern Europe, the Balkans) — that is to say, populations belonging culturally, ethnically, and biologically to the same ‘Albo-European stock’, as Senghor puts it. Not to mention that they concerned numerically small populations that were thus possible to assimilate;

3) current migration and the miscegenation which follows from it are of a scale never before witnessed in history, and involve extra-European populations, which changes absolutely everything;

4) the ‘ethnic melting pot’ is only beneficial if it involves close ethnic groups belonging to the same greater anthropological family. In other words, if any and all kinds of mixture occur, the population which results is no longer in any sense a people, but an ungovernable heterogeneous mass unsuited to any form of civilisational development which are susceptible to endemic violence and all sorts of psychological pathologies. It is this catastrophe that lies in wait for us, whichJapan, India, and China have been perfectly well able to avoid.

We are given the counter-example of the UnitedStateswhich is supposedly a melting pot, but this is false, for the American melting pot only concerned Europeanimmigrants, whose synergy was the source of that country’s strength.

The contributions of Blacks, Asiatics, and Latin Americans were not decisive. Moreover, the advancement of multiraciality in the U.S. is proving to be more of a handicap for the world’s leading power than anything else, as the American political scientist JaredTaylorhas shown. SOURCE

The above text is an excerpt from Guillaume Faye’s Sex and Deviance (Arktos, 2014). If you liked this selection, be sure to check out the whole book.

Share this news:

Like this:

BRAMPTON (Canada) – It’s been just over a year since Abdallah Butale was savagely attacked in his Brampton home, stabbed and beaten nearly to death, by a gang of thugs who were allegedly looking for his teenage son. (BlackAfrican?)

[…]

While his father is a strong man who served in the military in Africabefore moving to Canada …Butale said there were just too many attackers.

Share this news:

Like this:

Our military is superbly equipped for fighting…World War II. Unfortunately, for today’s requirements, it is nothing but a bloated blob, and an expensive one at that. From Fred Reed on a guest post at theburningplatform.com:

What, precisely, is the US military for, and what, precisely, can it do? In practical terms, how powerful is it? On paper, it is formidable, huge, with carrier battle groups, advanced technology, remarkable submarines, satellites, and so on. What does this translate to?

Military power does not exist independently, but only in relation to specific circumstances. Comparing technical specifications of the T-14 to those of the M1A2, or Su-34 to F-15, or numbers of this to numbers of that, is an interesting intellectual exercise. It means little without reference to specific circumstances.

For example, America is vastly superior militarily to North Korea in every category of arms–but the North has nuclear bombs. It can’t deliver…

Share this news:

Like this:

Even after the (told you so!) attack at St. Cloud’s Crossroads mall last Saturday night, the first instincts of elected officials in Minnesota is to rally around the Somali Muslim population to protect their sensitive feelings.

In an interview with World Net Daily, Bachmann does not hold back! (St. Cloud was part of her district during the years she was in Congress and trying to get her fellow members to wake up to Islamic supremacism and the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the Administration in Washington, DC.)

Minnesota’s St. Cloud community is still reeling from Saturday’s knife attacks that injured 10 people and caused panic at the Crossroads Center Mall on Saturday, a day that police chief William Anderson said changed the city forever.

I hope I am still around to see Bachmann vindicated one day and John McCain shown…

Share this news:

Like this:

The best blog to read on what is happening with the invasion of Europe is Gates of Vienna. Thanks to Diana West (via twitter) for directing me to this postfrom yesterday. In this translation from a German publication, we learn first hand about how a disillusioned refugee aid worker came to his decision to quit.

Germany: It is the most extraordinary thing to see—an advanced western society committing suicide.

Here is just a small bit at Gates of Vienna:

Farewell to Hope

In the end, the farewell was much easier than I thought, which is probably due to the exponential climb of my frustration, on all levels.

I have given up on my voluntary work as an assistant to refugees and migrants.

The many thousands of hours during which I tried to supply real help turned out to be utterly useless. Along with…

Share this news:

Like this:

Why are Western nations, and only Western nations, committed to immigration and diversity? Why do they welcome ethnic rights for non-Whites within their borders while demonizing any expression of White identity? Why do they take for granted the fact that not a single nation outside the West advocates diversity?

This is really one question, the most important question of our times, and the most puzzling question to come up in history; for it is beyond comprehension why would an entire people commit itself to its own dissolution. Is not the supreme principle of Darwinian theory the struggle not only for individual survival but also survival of one’s group, which entails an ethics of in-group cooperation and out-group derogation? How did it come about that such powerful instincts for in-group preference and loyalty have come to be seen as odiously racist amongst Whites, whereas in-group preference is taken…